Delhi High Court

98,981 judgments

Year:

State v. Rahul Kumar & Ors.

03 Feb 2013 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2014:DHC:4150-DB

The Delhi High Court confirmed the death sentence of three accused for the brutal kidnapping, rape, and murder of a minor girl based on overwhelming DNA and forensic evidence.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant kidnapping rape murder death penalty

State of Delhi v. Rahul Kumar & Ors.

03 Feb 2013 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2014:DHC:4154-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction and death sentence of three accused for the brutal kidnapping, rape, and murder of a minor girl, relying on unshaken DNA evidence and voluntary confessions.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant kidnapping rape murder death penalty

State of Delhi v. Rahul Kumar & Ors.

03 Feb 2013 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2014:DHC:4153-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction and death sentence of three accused for the kidnapping, rape, and murder of a minor girl, relying on unshaken DNA and forensic evidence along with corroborative witness testimony.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant kidnapping rape murder death sentence

State of Delhi v. Rahul Kumar & Ors.

03 Feb 2013 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2014:DHC:4152-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the death sentence of three accused for the kidnapping, rape, and murder of a minor girl, relying on strong DNA and forensic evidence and proper procedural compliance.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant kidnapping rape murder death sentence

Coral Telecom Ltd v. Elcom Innovations Private Limited

01 Feb 2013 · V. Kameswar Rao, J · 2022:DHC:4837

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking appointment of an arbitrator, holding that no valid arbitration agreement exists between Coral Telecom and Elcom Innovations Pvt. Ltd. under the MoUs invoked.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11(6) Memorandum of Understanding Arbitration clause

Hari Om v. State (GNCT of Delhi)

31 Jan 2013 · S.P. Garg · 2014:DHC:606
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court disposed of the criminal appeal of Hari Om by referring to a detailed common judgment in a related case.

criminal other criminal appeal conviction Delhi High Court common judgment

Mr. Rajiv Kapoor & Mr. Srikant Sharma, Advocates. v. CEC-HCC JOINT VENTURE .....

31 Jan 2013 · JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR O R D E R 20.03.2017 · 2017:DHC:1620

The Delhi High Court upheld a majority arbitral award granting delay damages to the contractor, rejecting NHAI's challenge on procedural and substantive grounds under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 challenge Extension of Time Contract delay

Liyakat Ali v. State

30 Jan 2013 · S.P. Garg · 2014:DHC:577

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of a police constable for attempted murder using his service revolver, rejecting his plea of self-defence and false implication.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 307 IPC self-defence service revolver burden of proof

OIL INDIA LIMITED v. ESSAR OIL LIMITED

22 Jan 2013 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Pratibha Rani · 2016:DHC:6788-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the arbitral award favoring Essar Oil, holding that Oil India’s termination of the drilling contract was invalid and delay in pronouncing the award was not a ground to set it aside.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Contract termination Government clearance Blow-Out-Preventer

Florentine Estates of India Ltd & Anr. v. Lokesh Dahiya & Anr.

18 Jan 2013 · V. Kameswar Rao · 2022:DHC:4742

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition for appointment of arbitrator filed by Petitioner No.1 due to lack of locus standi and non-compliance with mandatory notice requirements under the Arbitration Act, rejecting invocation of the Doctrine of Group of Companies.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11(6) Section 21 Doctrine of Group of Companies

Janak Datwani v. C.N.A Exports Pvt Ltd & Ors.

17 Jan 2013 · Jayant Nath · 2014:DHC:287
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court allowed amendment of the plaint to delete an erroneous admission regarding knowledge of fraud, holding that such admissions can be withdrawn if bona fide and necessary for proper adjudication, impacting limitation considerations.

civil appeal_allowed Significant amendment of plaint Order 6 Rule 17 CPC withdrawal of admission limitation

CRAYONS ADVERTISING LTD v. CRAYON ADVERTISING

17 Jan 2013 · JAYANT NATH · 2014:DHC:280

The Delhi High Court granted interim injunction restraining the defendant from using a domain name deceptively similar to the plaintiff's, holding prior user and likelihood of confusion sufficient for relief despite delay and difference in business fields.

civil appeal_allowed Significant passing off interim injunction prior user domain name dispute

Union of India and Anr v. Syed Sajid Ali

15 Jan 2013 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:1246-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 41

The Court held that the effective date of suspension is the date of issuance of the order with immediate effect, and suspension extensions granted after 90 days without prior review are invalid, dismissing the Union of India's writ petition.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant suspension effective date CCS (CCA) Rules 1965 Rule 10(6) and (7) extension of suspension

DELHI PUNJAB GOODS CARRIER v. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

10 Jan 2013 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2016:DHC:293-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal, affirming that DDA's jurisdiction to seal property depends on whether the land is within a development area and that title vests in the acquiring authority post acquisition.

property appeal_dismissed Significant Delhi Development Authority Section 31A development area land acquisition

Sarika Jain v. Saran Singh Chhabra

06 Jan 2013 · Manmohan Singh · 2014:DHC:73

The Delhi High Court upheld the eviction order based on the landlord's bona fide requirement for business expansion, limiting its revisional jurisdiction to correcting gross illegality and granting the tenant one year to vacate the premises.

property appeal_dismissed Significant Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 Section 25B(8) eviction bona fide requirement

Sanjay Kumar v. Janak Rani Sawhney

06 Jan 2013 · Manmohan Singh · 2014:DHC:81

The Delhi High Court upheld the eviction of a tenant on the landlord's bonafide requirement, affirming that receipt of rent establishes landlord status under the Delhi Rent Control Act, and dismissed the tenant's revision petition challenging the eviction order.

property appeal_dismissed Significant Delhi Rent Control Act eviction bonafide requirement landlord-tenant relationship

Jayant Kumar Jain v. The State

03 Jan 2013 · Anup Jairam Bhambhani · 2020:DHC:2654

The Delhi High Court granted regular bail to the accused in a property-related economic offence case, holding that investigation under a later FIR was impermissible due to overlap with an earlier FIR already investigated and closed.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant bail multiple FIRs cognizable offence Section 154 CrPC

Mr. Shivram v. Wealth Estate Private Limited

01 Jan 2013 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Najmi Waziri · 2013:DHC:7276-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn on terms allowing appellants to retain possession till 31.12.2013 upon payment of Rs. 16 lakhs as mesne profits and compliance with court directions.

civil appeal_dismissed Procedural withdrawal of appeal mesne profits possession damages

C&C Constructions Ltd. v. IL&FS Trust Company Limited & Ors.

24 Dec 2012 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Yogesh Khanna · 2017:DHC:398-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the validity of a consent arbitration award executed by a sole arbitrator appointed by party consent, affirming effective service on group representatives and trustee's locus standi to enforce the award.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant arbitration agreement sole arbitrator consent award service of notice

C&C Constructions Ltd. v. IL&FS Trust Company Limited & Ors.

24 Dec 2012 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Yogesh Khanna · 2017:DHC:397-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the validity of arbitration proceedings conducted by a sole arbitrator with consent, affirmed effective service on group representatives, recognized trustee's locus standi to enforce the award, and set aside costs imposed on the non-liable company.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant arbitration agreement sole arbitrator service of notice locus standi